Cases Report the Cronkhite-Canada Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cronkhite-Canada syndrome (CCS) is a rare nongenetic polyposis syndrome first reported by Cronkhite and Canada in 1955. Up to the present time, the literature consists of ∼400 cases of CCS with the majority being reported from Japan although 49 cases have been described in China.CCS is characterized by diffuse polyposis of the digestive tract in association with ectodermal changes, such as onychomadesis, alopecia, and cutaneous hyperpigmentation. The principal symptoms of CCS are diarrhea, weight loss, abdominal pain, and other gastrointestinal complications, such as protein-losing enteropathy and malnutrition.It has been traditional to consider that CCS is associated with a poor prognosis. This paper describes a relatively mild case and reviews the literature, which more recently, suggests that it may be a more benign condition that might actually be reversible with treatment.There is some evidence that infection or disturbed immunity may be involved in the pathophysiology and that targeting such abnormalities could have therapeutic potential.A strong case could be made for establishing an international case registry for this disease so that the pathophysiology, treatment, and prognosis could become much better understood.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".